Peter Navarro claimed that his third report on how Democratic operatives "stole" the election from President Trump has "the most up-to-date statistical 'receipts'" regarding the alleged plot.

However, the report, released on Thursday, less than a week before President-elect Joe Biden's inauguration, cites evidence as recent as Dec. 22, all of which was included in his second volume, and the tome appears to misinterpret election terminology in making claims about possible election fraud and irregularities.

"Volume 3 of the Navarro Report is designed to serve as a capstone to what has been a comprehensive analysis of the question: Was the 2020 presidential election stolen from Donald J. Trump?" Navarro prefaces his "well-documented tally" of votes that he said could possibly have been illegal. "In this report, we provide the most up-to-date statistical 'receipts' with respect to the potential number of illegal votes in each battleground state."

The 15-page document continues with Navarro's salvo against "the authoritarian — nay fascist — behavior of a small group of social media oligarchs," the Democratic Party, "RINO elements of the Republican Party," and anyone else who disagrees with claims of election fraud.

These claims of widespread election or voter fraud have been rejected by federal and state officials and have failed in nearly every court case presented by the Trump campaign or its allies.

"At this point, we have moved dangerously in what seems like a nanosecond from a full and vibrant American Democracy to a Communist Chinese-style, Cancel Culture, Police State guarded by a collusive social media oligopoly that is beyond out of control," Navarro warns before launching into his final installation of election claims.

Navarro begins his receipt-checking with Arizona, which President-elect Joe Biden won by roughly 11,000 votes.

"[Arizona] accomplished the remarkable feat of exceeding 100% turnout of its registered voters," Navarro decries, appending a footnote that leads to an error page. "This is indeed a remarkable feat because Arizona does not allow same-day voter registration. The 'over-votes' alone totaled 11,676, an amount more than the purported Biden 'victory' margin of 10,457."

Court records from the Superior Court of Arizona do show that Trump, the Republican National Committee, and the Arizona Republican Party filed a lawsuit requesting a further examination into a report that "electronic tabulators registered a total of 11,676 putative 'overvotes' in Election Day ballots."

But an overvote does not refer to a turnout above the number of registered voters. An overvote is when a voter has filled out more than the maximum number of selections allowed in a contest. Electronic tabulators can perceive an overvote from "stray markings and other irregularities," according to AZCentral.

The court filing goes on to clarify that "approximately 950 of [those overvotes] affect partisan candidate races."

There were 3,333,829 votes cast in the 2020 presidential election in Arizona, according to the Associated Press. There were 4,281,152 registered voters in Arizona ahead of the election, according to the Arizona secretary of state's website.

The report relied on other allegations that do not acknowledge critical information about states voting practices. In Michigan, Navarro claimed that election tabulators allowed more than 174,000 ballots to be counted even though they didn't have "corresponding voter registration numbers for corresponding precincts, according to state law."

As evidence, Navarro cited a lawsuit filed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who in turn cited a declaration from a California economist named Charles Cicchetti, a man who acknowledged having no access to state records that could have verified his claims, according to the Detroit Free Press.

He claimed that "174,384 absentee ballots out of 566,694 absentee ballots tabulated (about 30.8%) were counted without a registration number for precincts in the City of Detroit." However, absentee ballots from Detroit's 503 precincts are counted by one of 134 counting boards.

The data Cicchetti analyzed showed the number of registered voters in each precinct and the number of absentee ballots counted by the boards. The data doesn't show what precinct the votes counted by each board were from, nor does it show the number of registered voters assigned to each board.

Navarro also relied on allegations such as forcing poll watchers to observe ballot counting from too far away — from which he discounted more than 680,000 votes from Pennsylvania alone. He did not provide evidence to show that any of those votes were, in fact, fraudulent.

Some of Navarro's complaints have to do with state officials using legal means to change state laws — sometimes more than two years before Election Day 2020. In Georgia, for example, Navarro identified more than 300,000 voters "who had requested absentee ballots more than 180 days before the absentee ballot request deadline, in blatant violation of Georgia Election Code."

Navarro cited an affidavit from Bryan Geels, an accountant, who in his own words said it was his "opinion" that 305,701 voters "have records indicating that they applied for absentee ballots" before May 6.

Geels failed to take into account how, under Georgia law, people who are disabled, 65 and older, serving in the military, or living overseas make a single request to receive absentee ballots for both primary and general elections.

That law has been on the books since 2010.

"In light of this evidence, it is impossible for anyone to claim that President Trump was in any way wrong in stoutly raising the question of election fraud and irregularities in the weeks following the November 3 election and in calling for his supporters to PEACEFULLY protest," Navarro concludes, barely a week after pro-Trump supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol in a violent attack that left five dead and Trump impeached for the second time of a charge of inciting insurrection.